Not quite sure where to drop this topic, so I figure here would do for now. 

 

What is the legality of the BCM Gunfighter Mod comps? They're designed to act like a comp/brake where it reduces felt recoil, and lateral pressure but also acts as a flash suppressor. From what I've seen, the comp reduces flash, but slightly. Would it still be legal under NJ law, or should I look for something else?

According to info I received from the NJSP Ballistics unit, they do not use the federal guidelines of the definition of a flash suppressor with regards to the percentage of flash reduction measurements meeting any threshold.

 

They follow the "pinky test" and what the device is called by the manufacturer and form their "opinion" based on that.

 

Unfortunately, the "A" answer right now concerning this device is - no one knows. I know that is not the answer you want to hear because I know it isnt the answer I want to hear myself, but it is what it is...

 

Personally, looking at the device and reading the description I would assume it was NJ legal, but when it comes down to it, it may end up coming down to your "expert" vs the NJSP "expert" arguing their "opinion" in a courtroom.

 

There are other excellent options that will fit your needs that are known to be NJ legal. The BattleComp and PWS FSC556 being 2 viable options that I know work very well.

I knew about the 'pinky test' from one your previous posts, and that was what sparked my interest in this comp, until I read that it also acted as a flash suppressor. If its in a gray area, I'll go with something else. If I'm going to be a test case, I'll make it something worth my time...a comp isn't worth my time lol. 

 

I also e-mailed BCM this afternoon, asking if the ATF had made any determination on the flash suppressing capabilities, but the rep that emailed me back wasn't helpful and told me to look at local laws. Figured I'd get a better answer here, and I was right. 

BCM is a great company and Paul is a standup guy. I can understand the stance of not offering what amounts to "Legal Advice" via email/phone/ etc... when there are so manny different States currently enacting "Assault Weapon Laws". It is just too easy to offer someone in the wrong state info that while technically may be correct may be practically incorrect where they live. Then you have a company getting its customers in trouble and customers pointing their fingers back at a company blaming them for the error. Too messy for my likes.

 

And, while I really like their products and would love to use their comp, but I just don't think it is worth it right now. You are 100% right, with other options out there that work well and are definitely NJ Legal it ain't worth the possible headaches.

 

Look at the two options I mentioned above. I am very happy with both of them. I bet you will be as well.

I doubt the atf has made any decision on this because there is no federal ban, therefore no reason for them to rule on it. I posted a similar thread a few months back and decided I wasnt going to be the test case.

I have one and it doesn't supppress the flash very much if it is supposed to. Definitely a good comp tho.

Save yourself the headache, spend the extra $50, and get a BattleComp model 1.0 for a 16" or longer barrel, or model 1.5 for a 14.6" barrel.

NJSP ballistics unit told me:

If the opening of the muzzle device where the projectile comes out is just slightly larger than the same size as the opening of the barrel, its a compensator.

 

TROY CLAYMORE MUZZLE BRAKE TROY MEDIEVAL MUZZLE BRAKE

 

 

If the opening of the muzzle device where the projectile comes out, is a lot bigger than the opening of the barrel, its a flash suppressor.

 

NOVESKE PIG

TROY MEDIEVAL FLASH SUPPRESSOR

 

NJ has "AG guidelines" not cut and dry "laws" when it comes to what is or isn't. It is basically up to an expert report from the NJSP ballistics unit to tell the prosecutor what it is or isn't.

Edited September 12, 201313 yr by medic2264

NJSP ballistics unit told me:

If the opening of the muzzle device where the projectile comes out is the same size as the opening of the barrel its a compensator.  

 

 

If the opening of the muzzle device where the projectile comes out is bigger than the opening of the barrel, its a flash suppressor.

 

 

NJ has "AG guidelines" not cut and dry "laws" when it comes to what is or isn't.  It is basically up to an expert report from the NJSP ballistics unit to tell the prosecutor what it is or isn't.

 

You do know that the opening on a muzzle break is actually bigger than the opening in the barrel, right? It's just not as large as the opening  on most flash supressors. THe fire pig you noted is a weird case as it is a non sound suppressing baffled tube designed specifically to be a flash suppressor. That's the theory. I'd claim it does the opposite. but hey. 

 

As for the BCM comp, if you involve science, it's not a flash suppressor. It actually creates some pretty large jets of gas. The larger opening is simply an artifact of assembly. However is the NJSP disagrees, you are going to have to spend some serious time arguing some fery technical stuff about how flash suppressors actually suppress flash and why the BCM doesn't actually do any of that. Based on the design, I would  excpext it to produce more flash than a battlecomp or dynacomp. and internet videos of low light side by side comparisons back that up.

 

Given the theorized metrics used, rather than common sense or science, I'd pick something else. It's not cheap enough or perfomant enough to feel bad about skipping it IMO.